[2022] KEELC 15650 (KLR)

[2022] KEELC 15650 (KLR)

The court determined that, since the miscellaneous suit had been withdrawn, the applicant who moved the court had died (even if substituted), and the process of execution was still ongoing in the main file, it was appropriate that each party bear their own costs in respect of the miscellaneous application. The...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] KEELC 15650 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Humphrey Njuru Karanja; Defendant: John Mwangi King’Ori; Defendant: County Government Of Nairobi
Court
Environment and Land Court
Court Station
Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Environment and Land Miscellaneous Application E100 of 2020
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Costs After Withdrawal of Suit
Outcome
Each party to bear their own costs in respect of the miscellaneous application.
Judges
LN Mbugua
Legal Topics
Costs Award, Withdrawal of Suit, Party and Party Bill of Costs
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Land and Property Costs Award Withdrawal of Suit Party and Party Bill of Costs

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Humphrey Njuru Karanja

Plaintiff

John Mwangi King’Ori

Defendant

County Government Of Nairobi

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Costs After Withdrawal of Suit

  1. 1 Whether costs should be awarded to any party following the withdrawal of the miscellaneous application.
  2. 2 Whether the absence of submissions affects the determination of costs.

Ratio Decidendi

The court determined that, since the miscellaneous suit had been withdrawn, the applicant who moved the court had died (even if substituted), and the process of execution was still ongoing in the main file, it was appropriate that each party bear their own costs in respect of the miscellaneous application. The absence of submissions from either party did not preclude the court from exercising its inherent jurisdiction to make a just order on costs. The court was guided by the principle that costs are at the discretion of the court and, in the circumstances, no party should be burdened with the other's costs for this withdrawn application.

Court Disposition

Each party to bear their own costs in respect of the miscellaneous application.

Orders

  • Each party is to bear their own costs in so far as this miscellaneous file No. E100/2020 is concerned.